B SRIKANTAIAH Vs. ELECTION OFFICER HINDUPUR MUNICIPALITY HINDUPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Election Officer, Hindupur Municipality, confirmed on appeal by the District Collector, Anantapur and passed in the following circumstances : The petitioner stood as a candidate for a councillorship of the Hindupur Municipality from Ward No. 14. He duly filed his nomination paper on 25th May, 1956. But, it was rejected on 26th May, 1956, by the Election Officer, the 1st respondent herein, on the ground that the petitioner was in arrears of land-tax due to the Municipality relating to the years 1954-55 and 1955-56. This rejection was made under Rule 7 (2) of the " Rules for the Conduct of Elections of Municipal Councillors " framed by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred upon them under section 303 of the Madras District Municipalities Act, hereinafter called the Act. Rule y-A thereof provides for an appeal to the Collector against an order of the Election Officer rejecting the nomination of a candidate. The petitioner filed an appeal but was unsuccessful.

(2.) The petitioner contends before us that rule 7 is ultra vires of the rule-making power of the State Government. The point is put thus: the disqualification alleged against the petitioner falls under section 49, sub-section (2), clause (g) of the Act. Section 51 of the Act enacts that the question as to whether a councillor is disqualified on the grounds referred to in sub-section (1) of section 48 and sections 49, 50 and 60, is to be investigated by the District Judge of the district in which the Municipality is situated. That is a tribunal specially provided by the Act itself and therefore any rules made by the State Government enabling the Election Officer (or the Election Commissioner, when an election petition is filed) to deal with such a disqualification is contrary to the terms of the Act. The petitioner's disqualification, if any, must only be investigated by the District Judge on a proper application made under section 51 of the Act by the persons named therein and cannot be a ground for rejection of his nomination paper by the Election Officer. To appreciate the argument, it is necessary to bear in mind the language of the relevant portions of the sections which are given below. We shall first quote portions of sections 48 and 49 and then the whole of sections 60 and 51, because it will be more convenient to consider them in that order :

(3.) The relevant portion of section 303 and rule 7 of the " Rules for the Conduct of Elections of Municipal Councillors " on which the learned counsel for the petitioner relies, may also be read :